On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 04:34:00PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jul 2020 12:21:10 +0200 > Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > * Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:17:11AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > * Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- a/kernel/kprobes.c > > > > > +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c > > > > > @@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work) > > > > > cpus_read_lock(); > > > > > mutex_lock(&text_mutex); > > > > > /* Lock modules while optimizing kprobes */ > > > > > - mutex_lock(&module_mutex); > > > > > + lock_modules(); > > > > > > > > > > /* > > > > > * Step 1: Unoptimize kprobes and collect cleaned (unused and disarmed) > > > > > @@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work) > > > > > /* Step 4: Free cleaned kprobes after quiesence period */ > > > > > do_free_cleaned_kprobes(); > > > > > > > > > > - mutex_unlock(&module_mutex); > > > > > + unlock_modules(); > > > > > mutex_unlock(&text_mutex); > > > > > cpus_read_unlock(); > > > > > > > > BTW., it would be nice to expand on the comments above - exactly which > > > > parts of the modules code is being serialized against and why? > > > > > > > > We already hold the text_mutex here, which should protect against most > > > > kprobes related activities interfering - and it's unclear (to me) > > > > which part of the modules code is being serialized with here, and the > > > > 'lock modules while optimizing kprobes' comments is unhelpful. :-) > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Ingo > > > > > > AFAIK, only if you need to call find_module(), you ever need to acquire > > > this mutex. 99% of time it is internally taken care by kernel/module.c. > > > > > > I cannot make up any obvious reason to acquire it here. > > > > If it's unnecessary, then it needs to be removed. > > > > If it's necessary, then it needs to be documented better. > > Good catch! This is not needed anymore. > It has been introduced to avoid conflict with text modification, at that > point we didn't get text_mutex. But after commit f1c6ece23729 ("kprobes: Fix > potential deadlock in kprobe_optimizer()") moved the text_mutex in the current > position, we don't need it. (and anyway, keeping kprobe_mutex locked means > any module unloading will be stopped inside kprobes_module_callback()) > > This may help? Hey, thanks a lot. This will help to clean my patch set. I'll send a follow up version as soon I'm on track with my work. I have to recall my set of changes and backtrack some of the discussion. I was two weeks in vacation and last week had bunch of network connectivity issues last week. Anyway, enough time for details to fade away :-) /Jarkko > > From 2355ecd941c3234b12a6de7443592848ed4e2087 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:32:34 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH] kprobes: Remove unneeded module_mutex lock from the optimizer > > Remove unneeded module_mutex locking from the optimizer. Since > we already locks both kprobe_mutex and text_mutex in the optimizer, > text will not be changed and the module unloading will be stopped > inside kprobes_module_callback(). > > Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > kernel/kprobes.c | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c > index 4a904cc56d68..d1b02e890793 100644 > --- a/kernel/kprobes.c > +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c > @@ -563,8 +563,6 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work) > mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex); > cpus_read_lock(); > mutex_lock(&text_mutex); > - /* Lock modules while optimizing kprobes */ > - mutex_lock(&module_mutex); > > /* > * Step 1: Unoptimize kprobes and collect cleaned (unused and disarmed) > @@ -589,7 +587,6 @@ static void kprobe_optimizer(struct work_struct *work) > /* Step 4: Free cleaned kprobes after quiesence period */ > do_free_cleaned_kprobes(); > > - mutex_unlock(&module_mutex); > mutex_unlock(&text_mutex); > cpus_read_unlock(); > > -- > 2.25.1 > -- > Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>